I’m also triggered by the phrase “scientifically accurate.”
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
I’m also triggered by the phrase “scientifically accurate.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m still annoyed from reading the book when it came out.
Magical energy-proof, space-faring, laser microbes…
xenon super-material…
a colonial microbe mineral mech…
And they never made the “Hail Mary, full of Grace” joke that the whole story seemed to be a set up for…
The reviews I’ve read have all been positive. Major hit, blockbuster and like that.
“The reviews I’ve read have all been positive. Major hit, blockbuster and like that.”
Um, PZ wrote a review, and it was not positive.
Therefore, you did not read his review. Two posts ago.
(want me to find some negative reviews for ya, stuffin?)
PZ
Do you think you would have enjoyed the movie if it had NOT been promoted as “scientifically accurate”?
Just another time-displaced, 1960s pulp magazine sf?
stuffin–
(a) Most reviews are now farmed by studios to maximise the early scores on RT, which the clickbait-hungry media then reports on uncritically, creating a vortex of puffed-up reviews.
(b) Part of the studio marketing exercise for certain types of science fiction movie is to pump its “realistic science”, even in movies that have woefully bad science, e.g. Interstellar, and Andy Weir’s previous adaptation The Martian.